How to include and recognize the work of ornithologists based in the Neotropics: Fourteen actions forOrnithological Applications,Ornithology, and other global-scope journals

Abstract

Global-scope scientific journals have played an important role in upholding a colonial legacy of north-south inequities in ornithology, and they now have a key role to play in increasing equity in scientific publishing. We explore common barriers faced by ornithologists in the Neotropics (Latin America and the Caribbean) and suggest priority actions that Ornithological Applications, Ornithology, and other global-scope ornithological journals can take to increase equity in publication and research uptake. Among the most important problems, we identified (1) restrictive (and north-biased) criteria for assessing research “importance” and “novelty,” (2) the high publication costs of the Author Pay (Gold) Open Access model, (3) language hegemony, (4) under-representation of ornithologists from the Neotropics on editorial boards and as lead authors on invited articles, and (5) lack of attention to ethics of collaboration and citation. We recommend that Ornithological Applications, Ornithology, and other global-scope ornithological journals (1) adjust their criteria for publication with the aim to publish all scientifically robust and ethically rigorous ornithology research submitted by first authors based in the Neotropics, including negative results and articles on basic biology; (2) maintain or create options for free or low-cost publication; (3) offer the option of a submission and review process in Spanish (and possibly other languages in the future); (4) increase the representation of ornithologists based in the Neotropics (especially women and those belonging to other marginalized groups) in core editorial teams and on editorial boards; and (5) introduce structured reflexivity statements, in which authors declare how local scientists were involved in the research and how equity was promoted in the collaboration that resulted in the manuscript. For these changes to be broadly effective in the long term, ornithologists across the Global South, and Indigenous, Brown, and Black ornithologists globally, should play lead roles in designing, implementing, and assessing the effectiveness of journal policies and programs. Spanish and Portuguese translations are available in the supplementary material.

Climate change and long-term human behaviour in the Neotropics: an archaeological view from the Global South

“…Furthermore, while case studies from the Global South have often been considered in debates over archaeology and climate change, scholarly production from the Global South on the subject has been largely ignored. Scientific production generated in the region is seldom considered by researchers from the Global North investigating in the Global South, either because it is in a language different from English—which we do not consider a strong justification—or due to more structural factors, such as not considering it relevant enough (see [38,39,99], among others). While we agree with Mizoguchi [100] that there is not a homogeneous theoretical discourse in archaeology at present, this does not mean that the theoretical production from the Global South is well known.…”

“…Had local literature been considered, a wealth of evidence against the proposed hypothesis would have become apparent (see, for instance, [41]). These and other issues concerning the asymmetries between scientific research in the Global North and the Global South have recently been dealt with by Ruelas Inzunza et al [39]. Among these issues are a restricted view of research topics, cost of publication, language hegemony, under-representation on editorial boards and as lead authors, lack of attention to ethics of collaboration and citation, burdensome technical and analytical expectation, and difficulties in maintaining regional open-access journals.…”

“…In academic communities from the Global North, scholarly production from the Global South is seldom recognized, even by some Northern researchers working there. There is a linguistic aspect to this, since most of this production is in languages other than English, although more structural biases have been proposed to account for such omissions (see [38,39], among others). This is also the case in archaeology in particular.…”

Review of Conservation Challenges and Possible Solutions for Grassland Birds of the North American Great Plains

“…Unfortunately, funded land set-aside and improvement options are limited on wintering grounds in Mexico and South America, and until such mechanisms are available, grassroots approaches to conservation such as landowner outreach and land acquisition by local NGOs may be the only option to conserve disappearing nonbreeding habitat. Importantly, successful conservation efforts in these regions may also hinge on greater inclusion and support for scientists and conservationists from these countries and a deeper understanding of local issues and culture (Ruelas Inzunza et al 2023; Soares et al 2023).…”

Bird names as critical communication infrastructure in the contexts of history, language, and culture.

“…Although English has become dominant in global science, excellent work is also being produced in other languages. For example, the number of non-English works in conservation biology is increasing at a prodigious rate, and there are still considerable language barriers between English and non-English scientific literature, including ornithology (Amano et al 2016(Amano et al , 2021Chowdhury et al 2022;Negret et al 2022;Ruelas Inzunza et al 2023;Soares et al 2023). These barriers are an impediment to conservation in both linguistic directions, and proactive efforts of multilingualization of this literature and knowledge are seen as an important goal to improve biodiversity management and conservation and other global challenges (Amano et al 2016(Amano et al , 2021.…”